Comparison

Apfel Saft naturtrüb Direktsaft vs Mango Lassi auf Kokosnussbasis

Overall, Apfel Saft naturtrüb Direktsaft has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 2.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientApfel Saft naturtrüb Direkts...Mango Lassi auf Kokosnussbas...
Nutri-Score — e
NOVA group 1 4
Calories 46 kcal 66 kcal
Fat 0.5 g 1.5 g
Saturated fat 0.1 g 1.3 g
Sugars 10.5 g 9.2 g
Salt 0 g 0 g
Fiber 0.2 g 0.5 g
Protein 0.5 g 0.8 g
Additives01
AllergensNone listedNone listed

Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).

Key differences

  • Apfel Saft naturtrüb Direktsaft has 30% fewer calories (46 kcal vs 66 kcal).
  • Apfel Saft naturtrüb Direktsaft has 67% less fat (0.5 g vs 1.5 g).
  • Apfel Saft naturtrüb Direktsaft has 92% less saturated fat (0.1 g vs 1.3 g).
  • Mango Lassi auf Kokosnussbasis has 12% less sugar (9.2 g vs 10.5 g).
  • Mango Lassi auf Kokosnussbasis has 38% more protein (0.8 g vs 0.5 g).
  • Apfel Saft naturtrüb Direktsaft is less processed (lower NOVA group).

Ingredients

Apfel Saft naturtrüb Direktsaft

Apfelsaft naturtrüb

Mango Lassi auf Kokosnussbasis

Kokosnussdrink (Trinkwasser, teilentöltes Kokosfruchtfleisch* 8), 11% Mangopüree*, Rübenzucker*, Maisstärke*, Kokosöl*, Maracujasaft aus Maracujasaftkonzentrat*, Stabilisator: Pektin; Verdickungsmittel: Guarkernmehl*; Meersalz, Joghurtkulturen. *aus biologischer Landwirtschaft

FAQ

Which is healthier: Apfel Saft naturtrüb Direktsaft or Mango Lassi auf Kokosnussbasis?

Overall, Apfel Saft naturtrüb Direktsaft has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. We compare Nutri-Score, processing level and seven nutrients per 100 g. Your own needs (for example low sugar or high protein) may make a different choice better for you.

Which has fewer calories?

Apfel Saft naturtrüb Direktsaft has fewer calories: 46 kcal versus 66 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Mango Lassi auf Kokosnussbasis has less sugar: 9.2 g versus 10.5 g per 100 g.

More comparisons